Show OPINION ONNION GIVEN I IN OGDEN CASE Retrial of Action of John S. S Lewis Against Pingree Bank Is Ordered INJUNCTION IS SET AS ASIDE IDE I Supreme Court Rules T That hat i Lewis Should Prove Personal Personal Personal Per Per- Damages Wires When a city permits the construction of or a building c so that It will encroach upon a 0 public street then an Individual who ma may bo be Injured thereby must proceed proceed proceed pro pro- In equity before the building Is completed If he would have hare It removed from rem the street otherwise he must bo be I contented with suing for Cor ju Just t such damages as he lie ma may personally suffer from tram such uch encroachment Such Is the tho gist of or the ruling of 01 the supreme court of Utah In its opinion I handed down In the case ase of John S. S I Lewis against the Pingree National I bank banle of O Ogden Osden den The suit was brought b by Lewis who owns a a. Jewelry store Just north cf of the bank bani asking damages and that tho the court order the front of the building removed remo from the street ho contendIng contending contend contend- In ing that It projects Into the tho public g street and Is a n. public as re- re suit BUIt The Tho trial court awarded Lewis damages to his business b by reason I of a pillar In front of the bank banle ob obstructing obstructing ob- ob tho the view to his je Jewelry store show shew window and Issued a mandatory I Injunction ordering the front of the building removed from the tho street I The supreme court reverses the order of or Injunction and sets It aside It remands re- re re remands mands the case on the point of damages damages dam dam- ages with instructions that It be tried re-I re as though never tried tiled before solely ly for tor forthe forthe the purpose of determining whether Lewis is entitled to an any damages for fer nil nil- al alleged nl- nl I Interference with tho the use of his property for or business purposes by reason reason reason rea rea- son of encroachment of the bank building building build build- ing ing- upon the street According to the court tho the city is at fault tault In the first place for permitting buildings building's to be erected ao so o they encroach encroach encroach en en- croach upon the street But this done I it Is held even cven thou though h such encroachment encroachment encroachment encroach encroach- ment be a nuisance a private Individual Individual individual ual can cnn proceed b by law lair aw to abate a public public public pub pub- lic nuisance only when he be can show I personal dama damages cs or Injury In the present case the court holds projection projection I tion of 01 the building Into the street ma may maybe maybe be a nuisance but for Lewis to abate It he must show personal Injury 1 The court holds that the time for tor Lewis to have sought an Injunction was when the build building Ins was In course cf of construction construction construction con con- I and that now he has only a cause for damages es If It he can show that he has been dama damaged ed b by reason of the I pillars of oC f the he bank projecting into the tho street It 1 Is s sa noted ithe In the decision that a number of ot buildings in Ogden project I I Into the street and that Lewis' Lewis own own building projects into the street about I one ono foot 0 |